We're an independent, student-run newsroom.

The Daily Californian covers the city of Berkeley and the campus in unparalleled detail, all while training the future of the journalism industry.
Consider making a donation to support the coverage that shapes the face of Berkeley.

For UC Berkeley graduate student Alex Barnard, the most disempowering moment of Wednesday night was not when he was repeatedly hit with a police baton, cracking one of his ribs. Instead, the most disturbing moment of his experience came afterward, when he says an officer told him he had “no rights.”

According to Barnard, who was arrested along with 31 others as part of Wednesday night’s Occupy Cal demonstration, after he was handcuffed with a zip tie and taken into Sproul Hall, a police officer asked him for identifying information. Rather than immediately answering, Barnard said he asked the officer about his rights and when he would be allowed to speak to a lawyer. It was then that the officer told him he had no rights and, after Barnard disputed the statement, said he would be recorded as “uncooperative” on his police forms, according to Barnard.

“You didn’t have a voice,” Barnard said.

The experience described by Barnard and his fellow protesters’ violent treatment at the hands of the police — supported by video footage taken at the demonstration — has led to widespread condemnation of the police response. Critics ranging from campus student groups to members of the UC Berkeley faculty and even the national media have spoken out against the police officers’ use of force.

According to UCPD Capt. Margo Bennett, the identification process Barnard described is completely different from any kind of interview or interrogation process and is not involved with the right to have an attorney present. She said she was not aware of the exchange described by Barnard but said it is not the kind of exchange the department wants officers and arrestees to have.

Bennett added that the police force’s objective was to remove the encampment because it posed a threat to public safety.

“We already knew that if an encampment got started on the campus we were going to have health and safety issues, we were going to have public safety issues (and) we were going to have an element on the campus that does not fit with the academic business that is conducted,” she said. “Once we began moving towards the tents, the level of resistance from the students is what generated the arrests. It was the willful obstruction of the officers: the body-blocking, the pushing, the yelling, a couple times things were thrown … those were the kinds of things that prompted the arrests of individuals.”

Celeste Langan, a campus associate professor of English and one of the protesters arrested Wednesday afternoon, said in an email that she knew that what she was doing by participating in the human chain was a form of nonviolent resistance, knew that she was disobeying the police order to disperse and knew that her participation made her subject to arrest. But, she said, she expected the police would arrest the protesters “in a similarly nonviolent manner.”

“Rather than take my wrist or arm, the police grabbed me by my hair and yanked me forward to the ground, where I was told to lie on my stomach and was handcuffed,” Langan said in the email. “They could have taken the time to arrest us for refusal to disperse without violence … Since the tents posed no immediate threat to public safety, their haste and level of force were unwarranted.”

But in their campuswide email, Birgeneau and other administrators said the protesters’ actions — linking arms to form a human chain and obstructing police officers — did not constitute nonviolent civil disobedience.

“We regret that, given the instruction to take down tents and prevent encampment, the police were forced to use their batons to enforce the policy,” the email reads.

Taro Yamaguchi-Phillips, a junior at UC Berkeley and one of the 32 arrested Wednesday night, said the police response was excessive and protesters were completely nonviolent.

“I am sure there were many other tactics they could have used,” he said. “Their first response was violence.”

“(We) are outraged by the unnecessary and excessive use of violence by the police and sheriff’s deputies against peaceful protesters,” the letter reads.

Bennett said she could not make a statement on whether the police use of force was justified until an internal operational review about the event is conducted.

Similar stands of solidarity with the protesters were made by the systemwide UC Student Association, the campus student government and commentators across the country.

Langan said in her email that the complaint she plans to file with UCPD will in part address the arrest procedure. According to Langan, though she was arrested Wednesday afternoon, she was not released until about 1:30 a.m. Thursday morning.

Jordan Bach-Lombardo of The Daily Californian contributed to this report.

If you saw how vicious the cops were to the hippies in the 60’s and early 70’s then you would be surprised at how gentle the cops are now. Of course now we have video cameras to capture the abuse so they need to be more careful.

It’s only a matter of time before the cops become more aggressive. At that time it is likely that they will make it illegal to take videos of cops. Since Obama signed into law the bill that makes it legal for them to hold people forever with no charges, it is quite true that we “have no rights”.

Disgusted Alum

“We already knew that if an encampment got started on the campus we were
going to have health and safety issues, we were going to have public
safety issues (and) we were going to have an element on the campus that
does not fit with the academic business that is conducted,”

Um, didn’t you say in your open letter to the public that it wasn’t UCPD’s idea to confront the protesters/encampment??

Give it up, Margo Bennett. You’re in way waaaaaay over your head. Don’t even bother to insult the intelligence of the Cal community.

anonny mouse

As to what the police could have done differently: They could have used grapples and other less violent compliance holds. They didn’t do that, they went straight for the baton and beating people.

I, for one, do not welcome our police overlords.

Lgilkey06

You know, the policeman, firemen, ambulance workers, and nursing staff need raises too. NOT THE ONE PERCENT! TIME WE GOT SOME COMMON SENSE!

PresidentDon

When the police tell you, you have no Rights, no Freedom of Speech, no Freedom of assembly, no Freedom of Religion, no Rights not to be Searched, no rights in court, submit and leave, because we have already lost our nation. When the Republicans or Democrats tell you, if you don’t vote for them, your vote won’t count. That either you go along with them in power, and shut up. What are you going to do? That’s where we are now. and who is going to ReVote next November? Just be good little slaves and cooperate, and all will be well. Or elect someone to Restore not Change America, and put the people first. We have elected traitors who demand total submission, so go home and watch the ball games. It takes guts to be a Patriot, and we don’t seem to have any Patriots anymore. Just search for “I’ll Restore not Change America” on Google, and that will lead you to the answers to our problems. The rest us up to you. Do you want to surrender, or defend America? Don Cordell for President.

And you have a better plan? So far all we see out of you Occupy Whatever clowns is rioting, vandalism, forcing physical confrontations with the police, and intimidation of those who get in your way. Sorry, our current system, for all its shortcomings, is far better than anything a bunch of deranged street thugs have to offer.

I have offered my suggestions elsewhere, even if you are too clueless or lazy to find them. How about starting by reviewing all the expense line items in the UC system and eliminate all those expenditures that are neither part of the UC charter or mandated by state or federal law first? How about prioritizing expenses and deciding what should be funded first, and what should only be funded if monies are available? That’s the way intelligent, rational, grown adults handle a fiscal crisis. OTOH, children, criminals, and cretins aren’t interested in reasoning, and break things if they can’t get their way. Now which camp are you in again?

No, I read the entire Constitution, including the parts that support individual property rights, which violent children like you would take away if you had half the chance.

Chris

How can anyone accept that arresting protesters is legal? Since when do the police have the right to take away our first amendment right just because they cite “public health issues”? If we continue to allow the police or any authority to take any right for any reason we will lose it.

Look at what has happened with the Patriot Act. We were scared into letting some freedoms go, and our politicians ran with that; taking away more civil rights than any previous time in history without any approval from the public.

If the police can claim something like a “public health issue” then run into a group of peaceful protestors with batons, bean bag projectiles, chemical sprays, etc. how will anyone ever be able to speak out against a corrupt system?

Further, why is it the job of the critic to come up with a better approach for the police to use when arresting or “controlling” protesters. That is the same argument opponents of the Occupy movements use; “They don’t know what they want. They can’t even tell us how to fix the system. Obviously they are just ignorant kids.”

I say, it’s not the job of the protesters to figure out how to “deal with” peaceful protesters. It is the job of the police and public policymakers. We vote people into office to make those decisions for us as a society. If we are not happy with those decisions we can vote differently the next time or protest to voice a differing opinion.

If we lose the right to protest those things we find abismal in the current system, we lose our freedom and our voice. This throws us into a police state where individual rights and freedoms are trumped by those in authority.

Wait…. that sounds like the system we live in now…. Oh, right, in our system individual rights are trumped by corporate rights… my bad. Wake up people! Question authority! If you look at the world around you and don’t see innumerable problems, you are not paying enough attention for yourself!

Dwight_Lee

You are right to point out problems with the current system and reform of the system is a worthy goal. However, you will come to learn that reform does not come overnight as a result of a passionate street demonstration. Would you do a better job as police chief, chancellor, CEO, or elected official, than the current occupants of those positions? If so, then I sincerely hope you succeed in proving it to the world – we are in dire need of competent and ethical leadership. In practical terms, that means focusing on your studies and career advancement, making connections and getting your foot in the door to launch your career – and keeping your record clean! It takes much patience and steady effort but it can be done. It is key to learn to divert the passion of youth into productive enterprise – coursework, internships, jobs, leadership positions in civil organizations, etc.

Dwight, notice how these retards ignore the part about the protesters refusing to obey the order to dismantle the tents, obstructing public safety officials, and resisting arrest. This is the same left-wing tactic these people pull with illegal immigration – they simply ignore the details that don’t support their argument and try to shout down anyone who brings them up.

Anonymous

Our “rights” come at a cost when you disagree with the rich and the powerful. Today’s students and others involved in Occupy Movement are learning about those costs as many of us did 40 years ago. For example, in 1970 at Kent State in Ohio 4 students were shot and at least one killed when students demonstrated against the war in southeast Asia. You can read our story and see our photos here: http://www.facebook.com/people/Peoples-Park-Berkeley-Ca/100002868490694#!/media/set/?set=a.2580354745228.146809.1145197163&type=3
It is a facebook page showing what Kent State was about when students on campus
protested and 4 students were shot by the National Guard sent by President
Richard Nixon.

Your fellow students are going through on your campus
and other colleges/universities across the nation as well as the Occupation
sites all over the world. It lets you know what those of us who came before you
went through and what you can expect in the future. Nonetheless, you and your
friends will continue on this road as we did for we share the same idealism,
determination, courage and fortitude you have that can change the world.

Anonymous

UC Berkeley Captain Margo Bennet is a moron if she thinks anyone will believe her excuse for hitting unarmed students exercising their First Amendment Right of Freedom and Speech and Assembly peacefully petitioning their University and the governmeent with their grievances that the cops were concerned with “health and safety issues. Fire the witch!!

You can contact Captain Bennett at (510) 642-6760. Call her and tell her what you thihk of her. I already have…~NUMEROUS TIMES!!

Dwight_Lee

The harassment of civil servants that you are advocating is childish and inappropriate. Our police, who were quite justified in using force to detain and take into custody those individuals who were refusing to disperse, deserve nothing less than our full support.

[The harassment of civil servants that you are advocating is childish and inappropriate. ]

The kooks are feeling their oats even since the administration started backpedaling and caving in to their silly demands…

Anonymous

Tony M…you really need a reality check in that MILLIONS of people around the world obviously disagree with you. You have nothing better to do that be a minority of one? Get a grip!!

Anonymous

The civil servants you speak of were not “civil” and have no idea what a civil servant is. Dwight, please demonstrate the best way to be hit by a police baton using you as the target for education purposes only.

BTW a baton can be a deadly weapon that can split your head open like a pumpkin.

I’m proud of the movement and every single one of you who stood your ground.

The 1st amendment has no curfew. It doesn’t have a “safety” clause. It’s a core element of American democracy and it cannot be altered or restricted in any way without amending the Constitution itself, something I don’t recall the states ratifying.

The Regents, including Governor Brown, have a lot to answer for.

Excessive force was used against what was heretofore a peaceful protest – a protest of the swindle we have all suffered at the hands of corrupt banks and elected officials who serve, not the public as the Constitution mandates, but soulless corporations here and abroad. What possible advantage is there in suppressing the people’s need to express their outrage at legitimized theft? Who in their right mind thought it would be a good idea to beat students with clubs, or throw students to the ground by their hair? How many millions of dollars does the UC system have set aside for lawsuits in this horrendous economy?

I urge the Regents and Governor Brown to recognize the occupy movement is a legitimate form of political protest that is protected speech. We are all in this together. The investments of the UC system have been damaged by the legalized fraud, graft and corruption the students and millions of other Americans are protesting. What point is there in violent confrontation when we have all been made victims by the 1% who have stolen our future, mortgaged our past and know no allegiance to man nor country, let alone a university system.

Support the occupy movement. Realize it is the resistance. Respect the unlimited, basic right of the people to peaceably assemble in protest of their government. We are the 99%.

Lendogg

These people broke the law. They knowingly and willfully obstructed police officers as they attempted to get to the tents that were NOT to be put up. These protesters also failed to disperse after instructed to do so by police.

The Constitution allows people assemble peacefully, but people must still obey the laws. Clearly, protesters decided not to disperse, as well as block officers. These people are aware of what is and is not legal. They chose break the law. Stop defending their illegal actions.

Dwight_Lee

It is sad that injuries occurred, however, the Occupiers destroyed any of their remaining credibility the moment they refused the order to disperse. Disruptive behavior and refusal to cooperate with law enforcement have no place in an institution of higher learning. The Chancellor and the police deserve our full gratitude and support for their capable handling of a difficult situation that was created by a small (less than 1%) number of individuals. As for injuries inflicted during the arrests, this should serve as an important life lesson (a “teachable moment”) for young people: your choices have consequences, so choose carefully.

Guest

Dwight, and Lendogg, it’s civil DISobedience.
They knew, when the general assembly voted, that they would be directly breaking the law. Protests in the pasts have knowingly directly broken the law. Take Rosa Parks, for instance, who refused to move.
But since when does breaking the law warrant a beating?
I’m totally with you – they should have been arrested, because they were breaking the law.
But they should NOT have been beaten, and people, especially students, should NOT be taught that if you disobey, you will have the shit beaten out of you. That’s called a police state – where protesting defiance is met with suppressing volence. Whats next – they’ll start shooting people who don’t agree with the status quo with real bullets?
Sounds crazy, but so does students getting the shit kicked out of them right on the steps of sproul trying to exercise their freedom of assembly and freedom of speech.

Dwight_Lee

No one likes to see people being hurt. There is indeed an important underlying issue that deserves attention, namely, declining state support for public higher education. However, refusing police orders to disperse are counterproductive. Ms. Parks, once arrested, did not offer physical resistance but willingly allowed herself to be taken into custody by law enforcement. Occupiers and other activists should follow suit if they wish to avoid injuries and retain any shred of respectability in the eye of the public, which is losing patience.

Guest

Refusing police orders is not counterproductive – they were standing up for a symbol they believed in – in defiance of authority, yes, but sometimes the ‘authority’ is wrong.er.
In the videos posted, I did not see a single attempt made by officers to tell someone they were under arrest, hold them/take them by the shoulder or arm, or turn them around and cuff them. The main gripe with this situation is that the officers didn’t even TRY to arrest people before they started bashing them and dragging them to the ground violently.
Who knows, they may have resisted arrest at THAT point, and then should have been cited for resisting arrest. But our officers should be mature and savvy enough to be able to handle the situation without being the first ones to resort to violence. PEACE officers should NEVER be the ones to begin violence or blindly inflict pain on those they are supposed to protect. But the point is, they weren’t even given the chance.
I was on the fence about the occupy stuff before this, but now, I have lost all respect for the administration. Students showed more class than they did with the situation.

And tearing down banners, really? Jaywalking is illegal too, but you NEVER [or rarely] see that law enforced. Now they’re sticklers for the size of signs?

And in the end, its just tents. They don’t pose an immediate threat, and as Langan said, the violent rush they were in to get the tents was totally out of proportion with the actual danger. The only DANGER posed here was FROM the cops, TO the students.

Dwight_Lee

Activists should be mature enough to recognize when it is time to pack up and go home. The administration had every right to ask the Occupiers to leave and provided ample warning. Refusing police instructions to disperse is never justified, period. The Occupiers have only themselves to blame for the consequences of their choices to refuse to disperse and to physically resist being taken into custody.

chris

People are protesting because we have a broken and corrupt system. If proponents of that corrupt system come to tell you to leave and stop protesting, why the FUCK would you listen to them?

If you want to talk about undermining a movement, that is the number one way to do so. That is WHY the police and other “public safety” officials are shutting down these occupations.

Our entire public system is almost wholly dependent on corporations (as a result of their unfettered ability to fund political campaigns).

So, when the corporation that funded the Governor’s campaign (Citi Bank for example) asks the Governor to shut down a protest against the bank, the Governor will listen because she/he needs the funding for their upcoming campaign.

Therefore, the request to stop the occupation is not actually in the best interest of the public, and should not be heeded.

Also, just to be clear, Rosa Parks was not peacefully handled when arrested. She was repeatedly pushed and insulted. Read her biography before you make ignorant claims.

[Refusing police orders is not counterproductive – they were standing up for a symbol they believed in.]

The police officers have NOTHING to do with rising student tuition fees. They didn’t cause them, and they have no control or influence on those making the decisions. Getting into confrontations does NOTHING productive to resolve the issue favorably. If anything else, it’s going to piss off the same taxpayers would be the ones called on to pony up the extra funds.

That’s the problem with you left-wing activists. You value symbolism and emotional outbursts over substance and logic. You should know damn well after the mess in Oakland that local officials are going to be hypersensitive to anything that smacks of a physical confrontation, but NO, you idiots are absolutely CONVINCED that you HAVE to have TENTS to have a protest and force the issue. So what happens, but you get your asses kicked and whine and cry like babies. Sorry, but if you’re too fucking stupid to figure out how to have a protest and get your message across without violent confrontation (which YOUR side started by being STUPID), then what you want really shouldn’t matter to the majority of people in this country, because you’re simply incapable of conducting yourselves like intelligent, rational adults.

Anonymous

The Chancellor and police deserve exactly what happened to them…a call for their resignation and a big law suit! More law suits to come with each move on their part….they will be held to public ridicule for the forseeable future, in history and beyond…)

Clearly, we can all agree the protesters were breaking the law. This seems to be agreed upon by the people having an intelligent debate. The issue the lefties have is the use of force.

How do you people suggest the police handle the situation? What manner were the peace officers supposed to handcuff protesters that.are willfully disobeying orders to disperse? Should the prosters be asked very nicely to turn around so they can be detained? Perhaps offered some tea and crumpets for peacefully coming back to the station? What do you suggest?

Before people make claims of brutality or excessive force, they should be aware of what constitutes as such. I am not an expert in that area or police procedures and policies regarding these matters. Making such claims before knowing the laws regarding these situations is ignorant.

Guest

Doesn’t seem too hard for the police to try a peaceful arrest first. All they had to do was put a hand on a protesters shoulder, say “you are under arrest for civil disobedience, please come with me peacefully” and then turn them around and do their job handcuffing. Not beat someone and break their bones first, and THEN arrest them and tell them they have absolutely no rights. I mean, doesn’t seem too hard to at least try option 1 first, right? If it fails they can move on to a second step that’s more forceful. Regardless, I don’t know where civil disobedience should ever be met with broken bones. Because that’s what happened, cited in the article. Broken ribs. Now, things like pushing a person to the ground? That’s fine in my book as long as it doesn’t cause any lasting physical damage.

Anonymous

Hey Folks? Regarding TonyM?

He’s a either a paid professional or a bot. If he’s a bot, then he’s a social networking AI, not a real person. Take a look at his profile. No human being can type THAT MANY replies to a story in 60 seconds unless they’re either paid to do this sort of thing, or they’re actually a bot.

After reading the comments ,it appears that one person clearly thinks the students started the confrontation.
Check out the first 15 seconds of this video. Children with their arms linked peacefully, suddenly being beaten by police. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H8BHp7r8USg

Den Hickey

California police… nothing better to do than beat people for illegally camping.

Anonymous

I called Berkeley university chief police, of course I could not pass his attendant. I asked her if she could tell me who order the assault on Cal students, she said was the university and outside agencies, then I ask I would like to know the name of those agencies so I can file a proper complaint, she then pursued to laugh, then I asked her is this funny to you kids being beat up? you would not have a job if wasn’t for them, she then hang up! I was so upset that i did not call back. ‎1. as she answers my first question she passively accepts the students were assaulted. 2. Janet (that was her name) acts of laughing demonstrates the attitude of those who are in law enforcement jobs towards the movement. They think is a joke and bothersome and annoying nothing else.

Nope, spent my Sunday at work testing out a PLC program I wrote to run a piece of equipment we are designing. Write code, test, collect data, debug, repeat cycle. Can’t stray too far from the emergency stop, so I did some web surfing and listened to tunes while waiting for the equipment to go through its paces. Not every moment of an engineer’s life is packed with thrills and excitement…

Gunther

If this kind of police brutality keeps up in America, we’d be no different than the nations we are claiming to “liberate” in the Middle East.

Dwight_Lee

Really? That’s a pretty strong statement. I read in the news that the regimes of certain Middle Eastern nations have resorted to firing indiscriminately into crowds of their own people. I would say (and I hope you agree) that your comparison is an unfair indictment of our law enforcement.

Gunther

I wish I could say it’s an unfair comparison but this is how it starts. And I speak from experience. Those Middle Eastern regimes don’t become violent overnight, it’s a gradual progression. Their law enforcement has had years to become as violent as they are now. And that kind of violence is usually cultivated in cops when people disregard incidents like this one. It empowers the law enforcement to continue abusing their power rather being responsible about it. I sincerely hope that our law enforcement never becomes like theirs but that means we, the citizens, need to hold them accountable every time they do something that is against the Constitution.

Den Hickey

Kent state, Dwight. Then, of course, about ten years ago they tried to get assault rifles for the campus cops at Kent State… and they did get them for a little while. Take a look at the way bean bag guns, tazers, and tear gas projectiles are being used… to torture, maim, and possibly kill. We had a young woman here in Boston be killed by a bean bag gun fired at her head by a cop trying to clear the streets near Fenway Park after a game.

Monstershoes

Since when does making a human chain constitute and act of unwarranted civil disrupt and violence? What kind of age are we in, when the government can strip away the basic Miranda rights of a human after destroying their constitutional right to protest?

[Since when does making a human chain constitute and act of unwarranted civil disrupt and violence?]

When you interfere with the lawful orders of a police officer or obstruct them in the course of their duties, it’s a misdemeanor under Section 148 of the California Penal Code. Come on now, you can play your silly-assed games all day, but NOBODY was arrested or beaten for “protesting” or had their First Amendment rights violated. To insist otherwise merely hints at your own ignorance regarding the law.

stephen weber

Tony , my little pal. Check out the first 15 seconds of this video. Children with their arms linked, suddenly being beaten by police.

Really? Savage beatings with nightsticks are the routine consequences of non-violent misdemeanors now? My, how fascist of you. I guess actual, you know, violence will now be met by automatic gunfire as the standard escalation. Kent State II, here we come.

Given that your side thinks it’s necessary to vandalize property and fight with cops to achieve your agenda, where do you think you have any moral authority to complain about the actions of others?

Webelotom

Those who accuse others of fascism usually know the least about what fascism actually is.

fas·cism
noun 1. (sometimes initial capital letter) a governmental system led by a dictator having complete power, forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism, regimenting all industry, commerce, etc., and emphasizing an aggressive nationalism and often racism.
2. (sometimes initial capital letter) the philosophy, principles, or methods of fascism.
3. (initial capital letter) a fascist movement, especially the one established by Mussolini in Italy 1922–43.

So who is calling for a dictator again?
Oh right, nobody. And you’re an idiot.

Maybe we shouldn’t pay YOU any mind, given that you’re fundamentally dishonest and can’t actually address any of my arguments, much less refute them…

deaddrop

Don’t worry NATO is coming to help you out.

Live In Words

Scary. But all too possibly true.

Anonymous

Watch the videos. You can bet every one of those students knew they risked arrest and physical injury. And yet not one of them fought back or ran away! None of them was armed with anything but knowledge and commitment to the values of economic and social justice – for all of us, by the way (the University of California is a PUBLIC university for all Californians, and is currently in violation of the Master Plan) They displayed great courage and dignity in the face of confrontation by a police force in full riot gear.

The Chancellor and the administration has betrayed them, once again (as in 2009) Don’t abandon them further by withdrawing donations and support. Instead, write to the administration demanding accountability and protection of 1st Amendment rights! Continue to uphold the greatness of this university as the birthplace of the Free Speech movement!

Patriot Act my booty

Congress has no right to make laws that counter the CONSTITUTION OF THE
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. GOD, I’m getting SICK of repeating myself to
you idiots. Excuse me for the emotion, but you people standing up for the police on this issue are obviously not too educated on anything to do with human rights (or you are a part of the corruption yourself). Get lost.

Patriot Act my booty

I will not stop repeating myself until it sinks in to your pea-brains. Same tactic your mothers probably had to use when you were children.

In other words, you will keep repeating yourself in the hopes that somehow it will make it true if you say it enough times. Figures…

stephen weber

Still repeating to you..
Tony , my little pal. Check out the first 15 seconds of this video. Children with their arms linked, suddenly being beaten by police. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H8BHp7r8USg

* The First Amendment right to freedom of speech and PEACEFUL assembly does NOT compel others to provide a forum, nor does “free speech” grant any right to vandalize, riot, fight with the cops, erect squatter’s camps, or any of the other ancillary activities that lefties associate with protests and demonstrations.

* Obstruction of the lawful orders or duties of a sworn police officer or any other public safety official is a violation of Section 148 of the California Penal Code, and can result in arrests, fines, and imprisonment.

* It is perfectly possible to have a demonstration/protest in a peaceful manner without fear of physical violence. Those protesters who did NOT obstruct the efforts were not hurt or harmed in any way. Only those who sought out a confrontation got hurt.

* In any crowd, there are always people looking for trouble. They exist in both the Tea Party and the Occupy Whatever movement. The Tea Party people handle this issue by self-policing their events: if you look like you’re attending one of their events just to start a physical confrontation or to spew racial or ethnic bigotry, you WILL be confronted by a handful of ex-military/cop/construction worker making it clear you better move on and find another venue. OTOH, the Occupy Whatever people clearly have a sizable portion of junior Bolshekik wanna-bes, anarcho-asshole street brawlers, and the usual malcontents, who use the opportunity to incite confrontations and cause problems.

* Confrontations with the police achieve NOTHING to address your stated goals (i.e. reduction of tuition fees). The cops didn’t cause the problem, and they have NO control over the matter. To force a confrontation is stupid and counterproductive, UNLESS your intent was merely to brawl with the cops in the first place.

stephen weber

Tony , my little pal. Check out the first 15 seconds of this video. Children with their arms linked, suddenly being beaten by police.

Guest

“…result in arrests, fines, or imprisonment”

Nowhere does it say you risk a beating.
The protesters knew they were breaking the law and risking being arrested. They were waiting to be arrested. They challeneged the police, yes, but they did not threaten the police.
They did npt expect to be beaten, grabbed violently by the hair and thrown to the ground.

Nobody ( or very few ) are saying they shouldnt have been arrested. But they should not have been beaten, even according to your own evidence.
It was the decision on the administrative/police side to escalate the situation.

Im not arguing that the tents are right or wrong, or if occupy is right or wrong, but the police response WAS unjustified and excessive.

Same here. So-called “students” who are too dumb to recognize that forcing confrontation with police officers carrying out lawful orders is NOT protected “free speech” under the First Amendment clearly aren’t bright enough to attend college, and are a waste of taxpayer resources. Kick ’em out and let someone who’s willing to act like a grown adult take their place instead…

Patriot Act my booty

Freedom of Assembly. Look it up GENIUS.

Webelotom

They didn’t get beaten for ASSEMBLING.
They got beaten for SETTING UP AN ILLEGAL ENCAMPMENT and for BLOCKING THE POLICE.

No, the protesters started it when they decided to engage in a confrontation with the police.

Guest

No, the protesters stood peacefully while officers beat them with batons.

Video evidence doesnt lie.
They should have been arrested. Not beaten. The police started the PHYSICAL confrontation.
Try reading the entirety of my post before responding.

And I mean..really. 30-40something year old man attempting to relive his glory days by commenting on news stories at a college campus? Trolling for left wingers to bash? I thought you had a job?

Anon

The protesters erected an unlawful encampment after it was expressly forbidden. The protesters refused to allow the Police to peacefully remove the unlawful encampment.

The protesters instigated the confrontation by knowingly engaging in prohibited behavior.

Guest

And I assume you think you are a good enough grown adult to take their place? By the way, there was no confrontation by the students: it was the police pushing and beating the students (even those who just walk by). Get your argument right before opening your mouth with insults that only makes you sound like someone with serious lack of intelligence (if you are one indeed, then God helps us).

Cry me a river, children. You want to live your fantasies of being big bad revolutionaries and wind up coming in second place in a physical confrontation with the cops. You were NOT beaten for “protesting”. You chose to violate a lawful order The police have NOTHING to do with your student tuition issue, but you forced a physical confrontation with them by violating a lawful order (remove your stupid tents) then chose to resist the cops when they moved in to take the tents down. You think the cops should just let you set up a squatter camp because you’re students and you’re somehow “special”? Get a clue…

guest

truly, spoken like one who wasn’t there and has nothing to do with any of these issues.

Someone

Your pro-authoritarian, pro-violence stance is sickening. Your whole tone above comes off as approving and encouraging the use of violence against non-violent protesters. You seem to fail to understand the point of issue is the use of appropriate force – i.e., there was no immediate risk or danger to life or property, so abusive physical force was unjustified against peacfully resistant people. God protect someone like you if you ever find yourself at the wrong end of injustice, friend.

Penal Code Section 148 – Resisting Delaying or Obstructing Officer
148. (a) (1) Every person who willfully resists, delays, or
obstructs any public officer, peace officer, or an emergency medical
technician, as defined in Division 2.5 (commencing with Section 1797) of the Health and Safety Code, in the discharge or attempt to discharge any duty of his or her office or employment, when no other punishment is prescribed, shall be punished by a fine not exceeding one thousand dollars ($1,000), or by imprisonment in a county jail not to exceed one year, or by both that fine and imprisonment.http://dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vctop/appndxa/penalco/penco148.htm

The so-called “protesters” forced a physical confrontation by obstructing the police officers. The cops were right. End of story.

Guest

Are you trying to prove that the cops can push-over students and beat them up just because of their presence? If you are, you are failing miserably because the penal code you posted mentions none of those.

Are you trying to prove you are too stupid to understand that a misdemeanor in the presence of a sworn peace offer can get you arrested, and that a physical confrontation can get you hurt? If you are really a Cal student, it’s clear you’re majoring in Social Justice or some other equally dumbed-down course of study because you’re clearly a slow learner…

Patriot Act my booty

A misdemeanor FOR WHAT???? Congress has no right to make laws that counter the CONSTITUTION OF THE
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. GOD, I’m getting SICK of repeating myself to
you idiots.

Go back and read the post regarding 148PC. Or are you merely ignoring what you don’t wish to acknowledge, in hopes that it will somehow magically go away?

Live In Words

Why not respond to the person who did read your post, and refute it? Why selectively respond to a single, unrelated response not even by the same person you were originally talking to?

What…not up to the task of entering a debate with someone who has some reasoning skills and refuses to lower themselves to slander to win an argument?

Guest

It’s not the fact that students get arrested that we are talking about, you ignorant. Getting arrested is not the same thing as getting beaten up. You can throw all the insults you want, but that only makes you seem more narrow-minded. And the fact that I am a science major makes your credibility go down to the drain.

Patriot Act my booty

Congress shall make no law violating the Constitutional Rights of its citizens. I don’t feel like looking the exact law up AGAIN, but that’s pretty much what it says.

Anonymous

You’d have been defending the cops at Kent State, no doubt. And the ones with firehoses blasting civil rights protestors in the south.

[You’d have been defending the cops at Kent State, no doubt. And the ones with firehoses blasting civil rights protestors in the south.]

Actually, many of my relatives who actively participated in the Freedom Rider marches back in the early 1960’s were proud of the fact that they protested peacefully and did not seek physical confrontations with the police – a little point that eejits like you choose to ignore.

Tony, your evidence deals entirely with the criminal penalties, and implicitly the right to arrest and try, for resisting an officer. “Someone” said quite clearly that it was the amount of force that the police used that they were objecting to, not the arrest itself — “the use of appropriate force,” “abusive physical force.” And you seem to have completely ignored them, which is neither a fair nor persuasive debate tactic.

You can repeat the point that the protestors are legally subject to arrest until the cows come home. I can’t speak for the other lefties on this thread but I AGREE WITH YOU, that’s just the way it is and it’s always been a cost of protest. Thoreau had to suck it up. Rosa Parks had to suck it up. We have to suck it up too.

But I don’t think you can really look at the history of the United States and say there’s no precedent for reasonable protest — after all, the event that FOUNDED this nation you feel so strongly about was thoroughly internationally illegal under the colonialist, divine-right-of-kings standards of the time. No matter how many times you put scare quotes around the term “protestors,” it does not delegitimize these people’s explicit and precedented civil right to protest their government. Because the thing that legitimizes this right is called “their US citizenship,” and you personally disliking their political ideas does NOTHING to change that. (If you derail this conversation into immigration, which is not relevant, I swear I will Jedi force-choke you. :) )

tl;dr version: This is about MEANS of arrest and the use of excessive force. You have supported the right of these police to arrest protestors, which did not seem to be in dispute. You have done nothing to support the idea that the AMOUNT of force they used in the arrest was legitimate , legal, or moral. I have nothing against you as a person, Tony, but your argument is a total non-sequitur and its abusive nature is counterproductive.

[But I don’t think you can really look at the history of the United States and say there’s no precedent for reasonable protest]

I NEVER objected to peaceful, reasonable protest myself, and have participated in such activities myself over the years. This isn’t about “peaceful protest”. It’s about a certain faction that went looking for a confrontation with the cops and got it.

Live In Words

They acted in defiance of the rules, yes, but defiance does not equal violence. People were expecting to be arrested calmly, in a civilized manner, not beaten with sticks and savagely dragged to the ground and then arrested. In numerous protests in the past, the refusal to disperse has been given, and those who dont are arrested. Not beaten.
The police started the physical confrontation. No matter how you phrase your rhetoric, you cannot get around that simple, incontrovertible fact. It may have been provoked, but the correct response would have been to obey the laws YOU brought up and arrest them, not beat them.

Anon

The protesters instigated the violence by ignoring lawful orders to disperse.

Guest

Sorry, but your so called “reasonable protest” probably only refers to the Tea Party. Read your other post.

Anonymous

Are you aware the cops could have used much stronger force and be within their rights? Tasers, rubber bullets, bean bags, and water canons could have been used but were not. Using their batons was just about the gentlest way to break through a human chain of non-responsive protesters protecting members who were breaking campus rules.

The Hero

The only punishment I see applicable in this is arrest and a fine. please tell me how that warrants a physical confrontation? Isn’t that only applicable to resisting arrest? If so, then what warrants battery in this case if the students were willing and ready to be arrested? Did the cops not think to see what would happen if they used a little less force? Do they honestly have a reason to believe the protesters could fight back? Enlighten me with the code on that, if you would be so kind.

Dwight_Lee

No one likes to see people involved in a physical confrontation. Based on what I read, some of the individuals involved did not obey the order to disperse but instead linked their arms together in a line to physically resist removal from the scene. They then were arrested. Part of that process involves the arrested persons to be physically detained and taken for booking. I ask you – how would you remove actively resisting persons – would you get on your knees and beg? Maybe try bribing them with an ice cream? I would invite you to try removing a group of physically able young people with tightly bound arms. In any case, you can bet that the incident will be thoroughly reviewed and if any officer found to have used excessive force then they will be disciplined.

I do beg to differ on this one point (and I generally agree with most of what you have posted here). There is a cadre of semi-professional agitators and malcontents in Berkeley who goat-rope students into participating in events for the express purpose of forcing a confrontation with police and other authority figures. Most of these are geriatric hippies trying to remain somehow relevant by rehashing the same tired old 1960’s protest games, fleshed out by a generation of up-and-coming young thugs doing most of the grunt work (starting fires, vandalizing businesses, etc.). It’s an ongoing game for 4 decades now…

Live In Words

I dont really see how stabbing someone in the ribs is an attempt to pull them away from their comrades to arrest them. Tbat is pure violenfe without any constructive aim- it is beating someone into submission, like a husband beats a defenseless wife.
They did not say, come with me, you are under arrest. The video evidence does not show them reaching out for the students hands to attempt to cuff them, it shows them all simultaneously beating the students and then pulling people from the corner – women by the hair – and throwing them down.

I just dont see how getting ones ribs broken is related to being arrested when you arent violently resisting. Who knows, if they had taken students by the hands and pulled them out, they may have resistex, hit back at the officers. But they didnt give students the chance – they hit FIRST , which a police, “peace”, officer is never supposed to do unless a citizen is in immediate danger…which is obviously not the case.

Not related to one whatsoever. Unlike you children, however, I understand the law and can substantiate my claims with cites. How about you?

Guest

HAHAHHAHAAHA ohhhh you’re funny.

I’ve seen you do that twice…with the same evidence.
And you NEVER respond to anyone with legitimate information, and instead cherry pick their post for a single sentence you can respond to by calling them a left wing radical hippie child trying to relive glory days.
Try responding with some intelligence.

According to your OWN cites, YOU ARE WRONG.
You so funny. If you are getting paid to do this, they should pay you less…you’re not very good.

Maintaining non-violent passive resistance in the face of violence is a great tactic for showing how abusive the authoritarian police state is.

The fact that you think it’s appropriate for police to break people’s bones for standing on a lawn shows what a colossal idiot you are.

Dwight_Lee

I agree that it was unfortunate that injuries were inflicted, although I would also point out that injuries could have been avoided if the “protesters” (not sure exactly what they are protesting, and neither are they, but anyway…) simply obeyed the order to disperse.

Patriot Act my booty

Congress has no right to make laws that counter the CONSTITUTION OF THE
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. GOD, I’m getting SICK of repeating myself to
you idiots.

Dwight_Lee

No need to repeat yourself – I did read your posting and I do understand that the freedom of speech (and religion too!) are protected under the First Amendment of our Constitution. However, there is nothing written in that document which forbids legislatures from passing laws against trespass, disorderly conduct, or disturbing the peace. Put a different way: people can express their views without creating public disturbances. For example, the posters on this forum are engaging in the time-honored tradition of civilized debate about important issues without disturbing the peace or engaging in disorderly conduct. This is a sacred freedom that we enjoy as part of the legacy of the Founders. We would do well to honor the tradition by respecting common decency.

Patriot Act my booty

Then respect US, because we are fighting for you, too. LEGALLY.

Webelotom

How is setting up illegal encampments legal?
Please, I’m dying to hear you try to explain this.

Patriot Act my booty

I didn’t know there was a law for a maximum decibel level for a crowd. The POLICE disturbed the peace. Did you see the video? These students were expressing their rights and they were violated by those sworn to protect them.

Patriot Act my booty

If we don’t assemble publicly, nothing will get done. It’s been proven since the beginning of time.

Dwight_Lee

I acknowledge the importance of assembly, however, is it not possible to assemble without disturbing the peace or trespassing? After all, several organizations in our country manage to do it every day.

Dwight_Lee, please keep in mind that Booty is the usual shit-stirring troll who can’t offer a reasoned argument for anything. He changes his handle to give the impression that more than one person shares his views, but his inability to reason like an adult gives him away every time…

Once again, the hard left, knowing that they can’t win the argument if they just stick to the facts, lies and distorts the issue. Individuals seeking a physical confrontation refused to obey LAWFUL police orders and offered resistance – and for what purpose, other than to fulfill their narcissistic need for attention? How does the erection of a squatter’s camp resolve the college tuition issue? It doesn’t. How does forcing a confrontation with people who have no connection with the tuition issue resolve anything? It doesn’t. Some of you went looking for a fight, and you got it. Sorry you’re too thick to get it.

Patriot Act my booty

Congress has no right to make laws that counter the CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. GOD, I’m getting SICK of repeating myself to you idiots.

As usual, you bloviating cretin, you can’t answer the question. Once again, how does forcing a physical confrontation with people who did NOT create the tuition problem in the first place, and who have NO power or influence to produce a satisfactory resolution of the issue, advance your particular cause? Or are you tacitly admitting that the student tuition problem is merely a smokescreen, and your intent was to fight with the cops anyway?

The Hero

Of course he didn’t answer your question. You’re using ad hominem. You’ve made it perfectly clear in your post that you are actually not looking for an answer, otherwise you wouldn’t be answering your own questions. You are also limiting your questions severely to only favor your point of view with research. That’s not only close minded, but you should not think so highly of yourself when you are met with the same type of rhetoric. You deserved it. You do not deserve the enlightenment of the answer of another human being.

Again. The students did not use physical force. They were beaten with it. And have a right to peaceful assembly. If me standing on my own two feet with my friends hand in hand and believe in something is considered a threat, then we all should go to jail from the moment we go to kindergarten.

The reason why you are met with the same rhetoric is because the cornerstone of your argument is under the assumption that the students didn’t act peacefully when the evidence shows the opposite. in that case not only are people who tell you they have the right to assembly are winning the argument, you are further discrediting yourself by asking these questions when the article already proves otherwise. Please save yourself the embarrassment. It’s already hard enough to think your questions have even an ounce of credibility.

Again, the protesters refused to follow a lawful order, were in violation of 148 PC and subject to arrest. When the protesters attempted to resist further and interfere with the police, they subjected themselves to removal by force. Sorry you’re so clueless here.

Patriot Act my booty

Congress shall make no law violating the Constitutional Rights of its citizens. I don’t feel like looking the exact law up AGAIN, but that’s pretty much what it says.

These are third-grade bully tactics and they are shameful things for an adult of any political stripe to be doing. All you would have to do to learn different about the motivations of the OWS protestors is take some time to study them in detail without prejudice.

Specifically, you would learn that they are HUMAN BEINGS, as varied and individual as any other large group of people, and that their motivations will range from the idiotic to the ingenious, the innocent to the evil. Same as the Tea Party. Same as every other group of humans that has ever lived, Muslims, Christians, Soviets, Birchers, Birthers, Buddhists, Bokononists, Turks, Belgians, queers, Catholic priests, ninjas, and everybody else. (Well, maybe not Belgians. j/k )

Except angry people. Angry people are frighteningly similar to each other, because they’re all thinking with parts of their brain that are just not that complicated, the lower bits that humans share with lizards and bears and other low creatures. There is only one way to humanize an angry person (and believe me, I have been that angry person more times than I can count) and that’s to calm them the hell down.

In the mid nineties, UC police were busted for watching porn on computers, whiles students were being attacked. Now they are out of their realm. The crisis for our precious students should never be sacrificed for this lowest of denominators. UC police are accepted regardless of qualifications, or mental health. They are armed as if they are expecting a terrorist invasion and should be disarmed and given cameras so they can allow others to decide the fate of our students. I’m so disappointed in Birgeneau, but not surprised. His is a political motif around power and a tired one. Disarm the UC police and take care of our students and insure that their Constitutional rights are protected. Find the ears to listen to them and allow their voices to sing out to the masses. The risks are staggering if we miss this message.

Dwight_Lee

Gig, I’m sorry but your posting is so ludicrous that it boggles the mind. UCPD officers must pass rigorous criminal background checks, interviews, polygraph tests, written exams, and drug screens. They are highly trained in responding to a variety of incidents and that includes the use of different levels of force. Rifles and other firearms are standard equipment in case they need to respond to an armed physical threat. For example, does anyone remember the violent incident at Virginia Tech? I hope that you will at least agree that video cameras will do little good to prevent loss of life during a violent incident from such an armed threat. UCPD personnel risk their own safety every day to ensure the safety of the campus community and deserve nothing less than our full support. Put a different way: if I’m in danger from a physical threat then I want responding officers with firearms, not video cameras. Birgeneau has done an exemplary job in a very difficult time for the University and he also deserves our support.

Patriot Act my booty

That’s REALLY cute, Dwight… but you forgot one key factor… Congress shall make no law violating the Constitutional Rights of its
citizens. I don’t feel like looking the exact law up AGAIN, but that’s
pretty much what it says.

Guest

I agree with most of what you say Dwight, but I do not commend Birgeneau. Issuing the order for police to beat through a line of nonviolent protesters instead of arresting them is not what I would call ‘exemplary’ …it’s what I would call tyrannical, and attempting to send the message that they will not tolerate any forms of defiance, and that defiance will be stamped out with violent aggression from our supposed ‘protectors’. Its understood that he’s in a difficult position, but as the article states, this could have been handled in a far better manner.

If I’m in danger from a physical threat, I don’t want to be afraid to call the police. What are students supposed to think when most likely the only physical violence they’ve ever faced in their lives has come FROM the police?

Thought plz

I disagree with you calling them “nonviolent protesters.”

Personally, I don’t see chanting at police, acting to intimidate them, and push through their line as peaceful, let alone remotely intelligent.

Also, if an unarmed person can ‘intimidate’ a cop, the cop needs a different line of work.

Webelotom

Screaming “FUCK THE POLICE!!!” and “KILL ALL PIGS!!!” seems kind of violent to me.

Thought plz

Think in binaries more.

And just to educate a bit more, if someone’s intent is to intimidate, then you better believe that’s assault (which leads to action by the police).

Go try intimidating a police officer one on one some time. You won’t do it. So why is it supposed to be ok in this situation?

Thought plz

The police protect the greater interest of the community. I’d rather not have them disarmed since police carry guns so as to thwart criminals who carry guns. Were guns used in protest situation? No, so get over it.

The non-peaceful protesters were not acting in the interest of the vast majority of campus, (as noted by their little numbers).

The Oligarchy and their pet politicians are going to order more and more violent treason against our country at the hands of these shitting fascist pigs as the rebellion continues to grow. These pigs HATE everything our country stands for, and calling cops “part of the 99%” is WRONG. They are fascists, they hate Democracy, rights, freedom, and liberty, they are NOT part of the 99%

And forcing a confrontation with the police achieves exactly WHAT in terms of the protester’s own stated intentions, which are allegedly to stop increases in tuition at Cal? You silly students are being PUNKED by people who have NO interest in your particular beef, by forcing confrontations with people who have nothing to do with the situation whatsoever. How is that helping your cause again?

Hmmm, your first question strikes me as a bit odd, no pun intended. There’s a vast historical precedent for public civil disobedience having a tremendous effect on people’s treatment, from the African-American civil rights movement, to the Stonewall riots, to the Bonus Army rallies that are responsible for such huge boons to American society as the G.I. Bill.

And you don’t seem to have really given any specific evidence for why these protests are any different, besides a vague and unsupported assumption that these students are “silly,” which I worry might be some sort of unexamined prejudice on your part. *innocent smile* Every major protest movement in history — certainly the aforementioned clearly successful examples — has received major, and often very insulting criticism from conservatives. Can you offer a little more to convince us the criticism is warranted in this case?

Now instead, I would be glad to stoop to the level of the other conversations on this post and call you a fascist butthole, if calling me names too would please you better. n.n Just be warned, you’re up against a silly hippie liberal arts student and if you try to debate me on fair terms… I will be perfectly kind and civil to you, but nonetheless you will get “PUNKED.” :D

Is that because it’s too rational to expect that if one is going to invest the energy or risk to engage in some action, it should be directed in a productive manner? Or have you bought into that entire 1960’s mindset of protest for its own sake, whether it is productive or not?

Guest

Have you met a Vietnam veteran? Saying that people who protest agaisnt wars are narcissistic is an absolute absurb statement. If you have not met or work with a veteran who experience the pains of wars, then don’t talk to me about narcissism. Oh by the way, many people who protested agaisnt wars are soldiers and their families. That is to show you how considerate you are.
In regards to being odds with the CEO and the board of directors, maybe you just don’t have the reasoning skills and likeable personalities for them to actually believe in you. So don’t act like you are the man with all the wisdom.

Yes, in fact not only were half the individuals in my Air Force Reserve flying squadron Vietnam vets, but a few were Korean War vets as well (that dates me for sure). In fact, our wing DO was a certain James E Sehorn, who was shot down 14 December 1967 over North Vietnam in his F-105D Thunderchief (S/N 59-1750) and released 14 March 1973. What else would you like to know?

[In regards to being odds with the CEO and the board of directors, maybe you just don’t have the reasoning skills and likeable personalities for them to actually believe in you.]

I don’t count on “likeable” to win over others to my point of view – I deal with facts and logic. Given that I persuaded them to engage in a massive technology upgrade, got the budget approved and have been working on it for several months now (with completion due in the next few weeks), I would say I have been quite successful at it.

Dwight_Lee

This is a bit off topic, but thank you for your service.

Guest

She answered why civil disobedience is being used, and you take one sentence from her response and say that all she does is pritest for protests sake – or ‘mass tantrums’.

And then you summarize all the 60s era protests as narcissistic hippies – but then go back on the statement, acknowledging that was a part of the whole – but why try to demonize the whole like that in the first place?

And as for your story… Well, props to you for your hard work ethic. But just because tjese protesters arent as educated about the issues that you see as the ‘source’ of the problem as youd like them to be, doesnt mean they dont have a reason to be upset. Its apples and oranges. Instead of dismissing left wingers ( and the right left paradigm is so corrupted ) as hippies without a clue, why not help educate? Why is them being upset about the symptom instead of the cause so wrong? Why ridicule them for missing ‘the point’ instead of pointing these recently ‘activated’ people in some constructive directions?

People do have to start somewhere, and at least they are getting started and getting involved, instead of sitting back and laughing at those who are trying to effect changes for the better.

Anonymous

It’s the only avenue left, dummy.

When the plutocrats have purchased the government, ordinary citizens have no options. We don’t have tens of millions of dollars at our disposal to bribe politicians.

*sigh* Watch Dr. Strangelove and compare your own rhetoric to that of the insane general when he’s talking about Russians and then come back to us. I’m getting tired of seeing all the craziest, frothiest comments in this thread be from you. We are not fighting movie villains, you oaf, we are fighting real people with real emotions and real motives, even if you have not wasted one MOMENT trying to puzzle those motives out. Instead, you have satisfied yourself by imagining police, soldiers, and GOP voters as some kind of horde of amoral supervillains the likes of which make Doctor Doom look subtle. Believe me, I have MORE than enough issues with conservatives…

I don’t feel like I have to play them up into faceless, featureless, heartless demons or dabble in this kind of “They HATE everything we LOVE!” bollocks. It was embarrassing to conservatives when they adopted it in the form of Bush’s childish “They hate our freedom!” rhetoric. And it’s embarrassing to us, here and now, when you do the same.

Anonymous

Always been the same..Berkeley in the 60s and then Kent State..where do they grow these so called Officers Of The Law ?

Some Lab in Area 51 ?

Anon

Where do they grow these idiot students who think that this will actually change anything?

JFC dude, do you people learn ANYTHING in school these days, or are you one of those low-achiever types majoring in “Protest Studies” or some other equally worthless program because you couldn’t make it through Chem 1A with a passing grade?

Our country is a CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC, not a “democracy”.

Get a freaking clue…

Guest

Go read the First Amendment of the Constitution before come here and lecture about Constitutional Republic. Oh yeah, by the way, in case you narrow-minded have nothing to say but call my low-achiever, I am taking biochemistry and has taken all the hard-core science classes.

[Go read the First Amendment of the Constitution before come here and lecture about Constitutional Republic.]

I have, and there’s no mention of “democracy”, erecting a squatter’s camp as part of constitutionally protected free speech, or any of the other nonsensical crap you pull out of your ass here.

Guest

Nice try, but erecting a camp does not earn an automatic beat-up. If your so called “Constitutional Republic” means that students are not allowed to protest or be present during the protest, then you have been living in the wrong country.

You’re making an extremely nitpicky and uncharitable point — clearly just cherry-picking the post of someone from the Evil Enemy Tribe for something to complain about and humiliate them with. It’s just primate dominance behavior and… um… not really what I would call a real discussion of any merit.

Now, since people around here don’t seem to be real fond of addressing each other’s actual POINTS… (Heh, didn’t expect anyone would do that, didja. You just expected a nice, simple poo-flinging right back atcha. Hmm, maybe later.) The distinction between a constitutional republic and a democracy is very fine in some circumstances, and very broad in others. Democracy and republic are used colloquially in an overlapping sense all the time, and I’m afraid that if you’re familiar with current trends in linguistics, actual usage is drastically favored over prescriptivism.Now, see what a liberal arts degree gets you, you philistine motherfucker. (There’s the poo!) And I only failed Calc 2 and went into Asian History because I couldn’t understand a fucking word of my professor’s accent. Now nitpick that and call me racist, there’s a good troll. ;D ;D

[And I only failed Calc 2 and went into Asian History because I couldn’t understand a fucking word of my professor’s accent.]

You know they have textbooks written in English, right? There are no accents in textbooks, and I have survived many a mediocre lecturer by reading the text and working out the problems on my own. Sounds more like you weren’t cut out for it…

Guest

Ah I see. so anyone who does not understand Calc or other science courses should be placed in the bottom of the intelligence. Sometimes I meet person like you, and I thought it might be the other way. By the way, I am a science major, so that I don’t need to hear crap from you that I study “useless subjects.”

[Ah I see. so anyone who does not understand Calc or other science courses should be placed in the bottom of the intelligence.]

Never said that, but some of you liberal arts types who parade around with the attitude that you’re so more intellectual and enlightened than everyone else need to be reminded that there are people who realize that your narcissistic projections are to cover up your own insecurities, namely that you couldn’t hack a serious course of study…

Guest

So far you have still managed to avoid responding to any actual points made, and instead attack with a flawed ad hominem approach. You slur this person as a liberal arts type who couldnt hack a harder subject, when they have already stated they are a science major.

Youre attacking them on something that isnt even related to the topic at hand, and your insult is completely unfounded.

Try debating something relevant next time, and at the very least try to refrain from personal attacks. Reading the post before leaping to judgemental assertions about someones personal character when its impossible for you to have knowledge on them personally is a good place to start.

Webelotom

There’s no point in “debating” the topic at hand because there is nothing to debate.

What the students did was illegal. What the Police did was justified.

Next topic.

yep

I doubt you had to sit through anything as boring as your diatribe.

Dwight_Lee

No, Too Much, you are quite wrong on this one. I’m afraid I must side with Anon on this issue. It is about time the University evicted the infestation of indolent leeches that calls itself Occupy Cal. As for their kvetching about the cost of tuition, perhaps they should think twice before going into debt to obtain a degree in Self Esteem and Complacency Studies.

What a cheap and unpleasant batch of easy stereotypes. Come on, Dwight. You are probably a perfectly decent guy. You know damn well all that’s going to accomplish is to encourage some angry young leftist to come along and scream that YOU’RE obviously nothing but an inbred redneck Nazi Bible-basher Randroid and probably something really horrible like a COP or a SOLDIER too. (I know that makes ZERO sense, that’s deliberate for satirical value — I am a leftist myself, but I know our weak spots :) )

And where will we be? Nowhere. Because there is nothing we can really use in your argument to hang an intelligent rebuttal on. Everything you say is based on some really insulting assumptions, like that these people are “indolent leeches” and taking worthless subjects because they’re lazy and gullible. That’s intensely dehumanizing, and… well… if you’re going to go on a moral tirade, I’m afraid you’ve got to remember the Golden Rule, yourself, if you want to have any moral authority whatsoever.

If you treat us like that, we really don’t have much choice but to treat you badly right back. And when that happens, you really don’t have the right to be surprised when we walk away BELIEVING all the nastiest stereotypes of conservatives we dished out at you… because it seems so clear to me that this is exactly what you’ve done to us.

Obviously, leftists have annoyed and angered you in the past — probably because you always seem to be getting into fights with them. (Wonder why THAT is, hmm…?) Why don’t you try getting to actually know us. Challenge some of these preconceptions you’ve absorbed and actually talk to us. And if a leftist yells at you… fuck them. They’re idiots. Most of the human race is basically idiots, on both “sides” of every conflict.

I’m just getting sick of this. I’ve done my fair share of snarking at people but I am ready for it to end. Cripes.

Dwight_Lee

Thank you for taking the time to write your detailed reply. I’m sorry if you were offended by my posting. I know the left too well from past sympathies and experience. But then I grew up. Life tends to destroy a person’s youthful, idealistic illusions. Anyway, young people choose their own paths and face the consequences and, we hope, learn from their experiences.

No worse than those characterizing everyone who criticized the protesters as being advocates of jack-booted authoritarianism, and in all honesty, probably a lot more accurate assessment of the protesters then their stereotypes of us…

Guest

Are you really arguing that one stereotype is more accurate than another, simply because thats the side youre against? No, the left wing stereotypes constantly spit out at people are no more accurate than any of the right wing stereotypes. It is very convenient and easy to throw the opposing side into a big box labelled ‘stupid’, but in the end that is simple laziness. Saying that just illustrates the sort of close mindedness that Rezeya is advocating against.

Democracy is what we have now, shit pile. Don’t like it? Then move to fucking Egypt instead of squatting on public property to try to force the majority into doing what you want, you selfish, entitled little prick.

Den Hickey

You mean like the Vietnam era, Anon?

Den Hickey

They train the campus cops to basically be a poor man’s riot squad and give them lots of shiny paramilitary toys that they never get to play with until they get to crack down on a large crowd. The rest of the time they have the humdrum job of campus police, which tends to mostly be pretty staid and boring, so many of them are itching for some action and to live out their peace officer crusader fantasies.

Guy Smiley

cops were cool in Portland tonight. It got tense, but resolved peacefully. Crowds were huge. It was amazing to see.

Hooray! I’m really glad to see that. I’m a screaming leftist, but dammit, our best family friend as a kid was a Republican cop. I didn’t agree with him but I couldn’t help LIKING the guy. He was a good guy doing the best he could with the opportunities he was given, and if there were things he didn’t understand… well, life is harsh and we don’t all get a lot of time to reflect on it.

Those are our so-called “enemies,” people working for a morally compromised system (IMHO). They’re not all morally compromised, themselves — they just happen to be the ones with the GUNS so, yeah, they scare us and that’s only natural and reasonable, especially when we see untrained, angry, or just plain rotten ones do things cops simply shouldn’t be allowed to do and get away with it.

But I can’t lie. I am a vet of the WTO protests. (I was utterly peaceful. In fact, I got on an overturned dumpster and screamed bloody murder at the guys trashing the Starbucks. :) ) There were a few brutal arrests, totally unwarranted teargassing of non-protestors (not to mention children and police animals present), and other things that made me very angry. But there were also a lot of cops that were professional, courteous, good-humored even sympathetic.

It disgusts me when I see leftists, whom I used to think had all the lock on moral answers, stoop to demonizing their enemies. The police ARE our rivals. They DO defend a political and economic system that I think is inhumane and unjust and needs to be fixed or replaced. They DO serve a criminal justice system that I feel is horribly prejudiced towards the rich. These are legitimate criticism… just like “Um… they DID attack US, you know” is a legitimate grounds for them to be wary of the Muslim world. It’s just when people start thinking these people are ALL GENUINELY EVIL just because they belong to the hated enemy tribe that we start becoming precisely the monsters we fight.

Hughesr11

“She said she was not aware of the exchange described by Barnard but said
it is not the kind of exchange the department wants officers and
arrestees to have.”

Since when do constitutional rights become negotiable given what context of an arrest you are in? Murderers get more rights than these protestors. Fucking gross.

Anon

Proof? Evidence?
Do you have any?

All I see is wild claims being made by a single hysterical grad student.

Please stop helping us. That poster said nothing abusive. All they did was issue a challenge — granted, one that they could have resolved just fine by actually reading the article, but that does NOT warrant an insult like you issued.

I don’t WANT you on our side.

Yeahwhatever

He’s got more likes than you so who’s this we you speak of. I suggest you shut up.

Anon

He’s logging in with multiple accounts to up his “like” number using proxies.

Suck a dick. Winning a political victory requires fervour. This is why the Republicans keep winning: they make outrageous claims and outrageous changes to fight, while the Democrats are disunified and impotent. Any real victory must be supported by those blinded by raw impetus.

Anon

Get fucked in the ass. Being a complete twat doesn’t win anything. It just alienates people. Republicans win because they have easy to understand platforms and they mobilize people at the ballot box instead of setting up tent cities in irrelevant locations.

It also doesn’t help that Obama is just Bush in blackface, and has been pushing a Republican agenda ever since he got into office. Of course liberals are dis-unified and impotent – they finally got a victory, and it turns out that they just elected another Republican.

chris

The only reason Republican platforms are easy to understand is because they are overly simplistic and n0t effective. A 9-9-9 tax plan or a 20-20-20 tax plan? Are you fucking kidding? Instituting such a flat tax would only bolster the already absurd income inequality we have in this county.

Anyone who buys into these “simpler” republican plans is ignorant of the real effects they would have. Unless you are part of the 1%, you will only get fucked by Republican platforms.

Further, comparing the Republican National Committee with Occupy protesters is absurd. Politicians actually have the power to make change. The only way for us to bring about the desired change toward less inequality is through protesting and occupation.

Corporate donations have already ruined the public’s ability to have a real impact on voting, so what are the other options? If you consider occupying places such as City Centers and major parks to be irrelevant, what is a more relevant approach? How does a dissatisfied public get their voice heard?

The reality is police brutality and excessive use of police force at demonstrations have served to bring more publicity to this movement than anything we have done on our own.

If the prevailing system is so unhappy with our dissatisfaction that they want to make things violent, bring it. As the 99% we are the majority, and we will not go away, even if we have to fight.

You could have just pointed it out to him politely. Abusive tactics like that only encourage more abuse from the people who have to read it. I personally only stoop to them when somebody’s already broken them out and I have to jump in and smack them for it.

Asshole. ;P

Yoyo

stfu hoe

Anon

Can you show the video footage of this protester being told that he has “no rights” by the Police? Any video evidence of Barnard’s claims?

I don’t appreciate the response “Too Much” and the “guest” gave you — there is NOTHING really constructive about casting aspersions on who someone is or where someone comes from, or calling them an asshole. It would have been fine if you had been abusive first, but I think you asked a legitimate question, and I am ashamed to have people like these fighting on “my side.”

However, there was quite clearly a Youtube link and the article quite clearly labels it “supported by video footage taken at the demonstration” so I’m afraid if all you’ve seen is “wild claims being made by a single student,” that’s really more your own fault and, as a bit of good-natured advice, I think you might need to look a little deeper next time before you start issuing complaints.

Alfonso the Great

Perhaps you need to look a little closer yourself; the above poster was replying specifically to a discussion of Barnard’s claim of being told he had “no rights.” (Which I suspect was either out of context or misunderstood, since the surrounding quotes in the article make clear that he was not being questioned by the police but only recorded after arrest, which neither requires nor entitles one to have a lawyer present.) In other words, the video footage of police brutality at the would-be encampment is simply irrelevant.

Anon

100% correct, Alfonso.

The cop-haters on this board don’t seem be be able to see through their blind anti-Police bigotry and rage enough to actually read the comments they’re replying to.

Anon

You misunderstood my question.
I was asking about proof for Barnard’s allegations about the Police statements.

It’s not arrest that they’re complaining about, Dwight, it’s the level of force used to detain them. And if you read the recent news about OWS Berkeley, you’ll see several articles that document criticism of these arrest techniques not just from “leftist” authorities, but from numerous law enforcement experts. If I really must, I’ll dig for links for you, say the word. (If I ever come back to this cesspool of a political brawl. >_< )

Dwight_Lee

Look, I’m upset by images of violence like anyone else. I’m not an expert in crowd control, so arguments about the level of force used might have some merit for all I know. But the entire situation could have been avoided in the first place if the order to disperse had been obeyed. How difficult it is for young people to grasp that tomorrow is another day…

Are you such a coward that you cannot relate to someone standing up to an authoritative figure that they believe is acting violent and unjustly? You say you are upset by the images of violence and yet all you can talk about is how it could have been prevented. How difficult is it for you to grasp that violence on a non-violent person is not okay even if it could have been avoided by that non-violent person…

Matt Alum

Though most of us see it as violence against a violent person. So NO, we’re not going to side with your whack view that we should use violence to gain instant gratification of shutting down those who are there to support us.

Just because a protester doesn’t fire a punch does not mean they are non-violent.

Dwight_Lee

If having enough common sense to obey police orders to disperse are cowardly, then I will freely confess to being a “coward”. I’d rather be a “coward” who wakes up a free person in his/her own bed at home in the morning instead of be a “brave” fool in jail with broken ribs. There are ways of expressing dissent without breaking the law.

What if some of us do NOT want to change the “fundamentals” of the system, because most of the Occupy Whatever protesters are merely offering various rehashed versions of Marxism as the solution? What if we merely wish to address the funding issue so that students don’t have to pay increased tuition, and wish to focus on critically examining the UC budget to see if there isn’t some waste or fat that could be trimmed somewhere to keep tuition at the current levels? How does setting up stupid tents and forcing an idiotic physical confrontation with the campus police accomplish ANY of that? Please tell me…

Anonymous

There’s nothing Marxist about holding people in power to account.

People should be accountable for their decisions and their mistakes.

The way you right-wingers fight so hard to avoid personal accountability (all while nonsensically blathering on about “personal responsibility”) is disgusting and shameful.

If you really give a crap about personal responsibility, then you should be out there with the Occupiers demanding that the Wall St. bankers whose fraudulent dealings tanked our economy by arrested and tried for their crimes – not rewarded with billions of taxpayer dollars.

Tori

Your comments are SO annoying.

Webelotom

Your comments are SO annoying.

Den Hickey

And let me guess.. if you don’t want to be brutalized and have your rights violated then don’t get arrested. Remind me again when I stopped living in America, Dwight. Remind me when it became reasonable to beat people for these incredibly minor infractions.

Dwight_Lee

There is no need for you to get hysterical and jump to crazy conclusions – I spelled it out clearly in the previous post: if you don’t want to be arrested, then obey police instructions to disperse. If you don’t want to be forcefully taken into custody, then don’t resist arrest. Your choices have consequences. There is nothing un-American about asking crowds to disperse or using force to take persons who are resisting arrest into custody. This used to be known as common sense.

Den Hickey

Thats not hysterical. There have been multiple documented cases of the police assaulting people who were not resisting and at times were not even being arrested. There are also multiple documented cases of the police arresting people who are not breaking any law or disobeying any order. In a perfect world where everything works exactly as it is supposed to your comments might make perfect sense… but this is not a perfect world and the police are known to often abuse their authority and have repeatedly done so during these demonstrations.

Dwight_Lee

Police misconduct does unfortunately occur, however, the place to confront that problem is in court, not on the street.

Den Hickey

So, no one should ever act to stop it… they should just take their beating and then hope the courts will take their word over the officers’ that it was excessive force. Yah, I hear that worked out really well for Rodney King and Malice Green. Or are you trying to say that these people were trying to deal with this problem in the streets by protesting it… while it was happening to them?

How can the charges of obstructing a peace officer hold when it is obvious that the officers were there for other than peaceful purposes?

Hughesr11

Akin to Orwell’s 1984, the entire notion of words reflecting reality has been grotesquely twisted. Think about it…The Patriot Act that is anything but patriotic. They want to introduce a bill that destroys net neutrality, so they call it freedom of internet act. More is less, less is more.

I remember in 1984, at the end they were saying good news, we’ve increased your daily ration of chocolate from 10 grams a week to 5.

guest

They were there to keep the peace by making sure that none of the students engaged in the expressly prohibited behavior of setting up an unlawful encampment on campus.

If you want to blame someone, blame the protesters who set up the tents. They’re the ones who turned the peaceful protest violent by challenging the cops.

[Look at this shitting right wing fascist cock sucker trying to blame the victims. Amazing. Bet you this shit hole is a Christian Republican.]

I take back the comment I made earlier about you being a Protest Studies major at Cal. I’m willing to bet you couldn’t even make the grade to be accepted to Cal, and are one of the pizza-and-spare-change-panhandling children playing “gutter punk” on Telegraph until the stores close down, then head home on BART to Orinda to spent the night with Mommy and Daddy…

Hey, I understand the principle of “give as you get” as well as anybody, but come on. Do you really think you’re going to get anywhere with this guy like that?

For all you know, he’s a decent guy having a shitty day, who just happens to believe some things you don’t believe in, and got pushed (somewhat legitimately) into rage. I’m willing to stop and believe the same of you. Can we just cut this shit out?

This “Too Much” dude could be a Ph.D. with some anger management control problems — c’mon, Tony, TELL me you haven’t met some very successful people and rolled your eyes at how freakin’ NAIVE they were despite it. You and he and I don’t know a goddamn thing about each other except whether we’re playing skins or shirts in this country’s idiotic political brawl.

Any common ground or solutions we might’ve found are getting buried in this bullshit. Is SOMEBODY gonna take the first goddamn step to figuring out the other side’s not pure evil — is in fact probably no more than 50% complete blithering idiots, just like the rest of the human race and every other political party in history?

(And before the angry little leftist crustpunks who are your opposite number start shouting at me… Screw you, my hippie troublemaker credentials are EXCELLENT and I read the spunk.org archive daily. I think this guy is making the same errors you do; I just don’t have to despise him for it, dammit. I found a BETTER way than this.)

Anon

He’s not a decent guy. He’s a pathetic little tryhard troll from 4chan’s /b/ board who thinks he’s hot shit on the internet and can’t get laid. He most likely has Asperger’s and Social Anxiety Disorder, and deals with his frustration about his friendless, sexless life by trolling online communities.

You know, pathologizing actual disorders like Asperger’s and Social Anxiety Disorder to make an argument point is puerile and reduces you to beneath the level of which you accuse him. Now, go back to junior high and learn how to argue without the ablism.

Anon

You know, instead of making yourself look like an idiot you could just admit that you don’t know anything about 4chan.

It’s a self-proclaimed haven for autists, social anxiety sufferers, and perma-virgins.

Get over yourself shithead.

Dwight_Lee

Too Much, you are not going to win people over to your side by calling them offensive, vulgar names. This is an important life lesson that your parents and teachers should have taught you. Please try to maintain some decency in your postings.

FWIW, I’m “your enemy” and I totally agree with you. I’m getting tired of this guy driving you people on “the other side” into bigger and bigger frenzies while I’m trying to exchanbge some actual freakin’ information with you all. >_<

Dwight_Lee

You are not my “enemy”. Behind these headlines are difficult issues to be addressed. Reasoned debate is healthy.

Anonymous

Too Much isn’t trying to win people over to his side. The time for that is done, the battle lines have been drawn. On one side is the 1% and their minions, on the other is the rest of humanity.

Personally, I like our odds.

Anon

Then your side loses, ChairmanLMAO.
The majority of Americans currently do not support the idiotic Occupy protests, and do not support the “GIMMIE GIMMIE” politics of these protesters.

You may think you support the 99%, but you do not enjoy the support of 99% of Americans, and the louder and more antagonistic you get, the fewer people you will have on your side.

It is you who are the fool, thinking that the dittoheads of Fox represent the majority of America.

The protesters aren’t saying “GIMMIE, GIMMIE”, they’re saying “STOP TAKING EVERYTHING FOR YOURSELVES, YOU GREEDY BASTARDS.” They know, as you do down in your gut, that the “Self Made Man” thing is a pure myth, and those who claim it are lying to everyone including themselves. The 1% built their fortunes on the backs of their fellow citizens, but now don’t want to pay forward their share of the wealth to the next generation, or even to share with their own generation who helped them to succeed. Selfish pricks, the lot of them.

This is what anyone with half a brain, who isn’t brainwashed by Fox propaganda, knows because they can see it in their own budgets, pay, bank balances and expenses. They don’t need some asshole with a chalkboard and bogus ‘facts’to explain it, it’s obvious, all they have to do is be aware of what is happening with their friends, neighbors and family.

The fact that you don’t makes me both pity you and laugh at you.

Webelotom

Who the fuck is talking about FOX, jackass?

Check your local news. Check some man-on-the-street segments.

Most Bay Area residents don’t support Occupy Oakland, and most Americans don’t support Occupy Wall Street any more.

Have you seen the lists of demands of these protesters? Free college for everyone. Free guaranteed living wage REGARDLESS OF EMPLOYMENT. $20 minimum wage. Completely open borders.

If we actually implemented half of the shit these morons want America would collapse within half a decade.

Um, Dwight? I’m pretty sure that in a previous comment you said “It is about time the University evicted the infestation of indolent leeches that calls itself Occupy Cal.” That’s a bit offensive and vulgar. Maybe you should take a deep breath and check your own temper before the next time you complain? I wouldn’t want to think you’re one of those people with a double standard.

Unlight Too Much’s screed, Dwight was merely pointing out the truth – many of these “student protesters” aren’t students at all, nor do they give a rat’s ass about the tuition funding issue. They are the semi-professional activists and full-time street brawlers who would have been at home in Deutschland in the 1930’s when various factions of Nazis, bolsheviks, mensheviks and the like regularly paraded and duked it out on the streets…

Guest

You know, I am moderately sympathetic to the protesting students’ aims. But when I see people spewing hatred against all of Christianity like this, it makes me significantly less upset about them getting hit by the police.

Patriot Act my booty

Ad YOU are Christian? SHAME.

Tori

I hate Christianity because I was a Christian for 25 years of my life. Brainwashing, sexual abuse (never reported), repression — you name it and I experienced it. Fuck Christianity.

Lendogg

It is very unfortunate, to say the least, you had to experience such acts. Nobody should be subjected to that.

I am not for or against religion. People are free to believe what they want, as long as they respect others’ points of views, regardless if they agree or not.

I do disagree when you say it was Christianity was the reason for you to be treated so horribly. The people or person responsible for commottong such acts, not Christianity. Whoever is responsible used Christianity to rationalize their actions. That is NOT anythibg Christianity represents. These were acts by someone misrepresenting Christianity.

Viperstarpoint9

What the fuck. I am not attacking your religion. I am attacking your half cocked shotgun of a mouth. Stop Attacking others your fucking low life. I bet your a God Damned Pedophile Rapist who claims God told you to do it.

Okay, this is a talking point we have to deal with before everyone in the country is regurgitating it and it replaces reality: challenging cops is NOT a violent action. Violence is… well… it’s violence! It’s the use of physical force for injurious purposes. That’s the dictionary definition, roughly (American Heritage), and if this definition is leftist nonsense, I guess the English language is leftist nonsense.

Telling somebody “no, you’re not getting through” is not violence — it’s putting your OWN safety on the line and is explicitly an ALTERNATIVE to violence. There were plenty of ways for the police to arrest those protestors without excessive force, and they chose not to. “Challenging the cops” is NOT legitimate grounds for brutality or excessive force — no law enforcement authority anywhere will tell you that. At least not in the USA, maybe you’re from Turkmenistan and have a different standard. *wince*

This is NOT to say that those students were not putting themselves in a situation where the police had every legal right to arrest and detain them… in a proportional and respectful manner, as is due EVERY U.S. citizen. That’s just the cost of civil disobedience and had the cops done their jobs *properly* the students would have had no right to complain… which only makes me question the competence of these police officers that much more.

Anon

“There were plenty of ways for the police to arrest those protestors without excessive force…”

Such as…?

crusty

lemme see now,mayor quan is out of town when oakland and bay area cops go nuts in oakland and the birgeneau is out of town when u.c. and alameda county sheriffs and oakland cops go nuts.is something smelly here?or what?also,is there a process whereby birgenaue can be impeached or fired for being a threat to public safety?

police_state_usa

They should compare and contrast these cops to nazi brownshirts. I bet there are many similarities.

Guest

They should compare and contrast these protesters to the supporters of Stalin’s murderous regime. I bet there are many similarities.

Joshkffddr

Occupiers are trying to peacefully protest for the government to stop screwing them over with massive deal with big corporations and instead do what it’s supposed to do; take care of it’s citizens. Yep, exact same thing as Stalin’s murderous regime.

Honestly, Too Much, infantile name calling and vulgarity are not appropriate in a civilized discussion. Try arguing on the merits of your case (this is something you *should* be learning in your studies).

Come On Now

He’s a troll.
Look at the icon.
He’s a troll from 4chan.

Anonymous

Comments like this do nothing but cause further division. There are Christian Republicans who support this movement and are not what you would consider “typical”. If they keep getting ostracized because of their party membership or religious belief guess what, they’ll stop supporting us. This movement is open to everyone and is bigger than simple religious affiliation or party affiliation. I wish everyone would get this and stop making supporters feel unwelcome, whatever their beliefs may be.

Thank you so much. These days, I don’t even think of right vs. left as our most dangerous political division. I think of “people on both sides who can hold a polite conversation and actually exchange ideas” versus “idiots who like to shout at each other on a 5th grade level.”

I love a good textual bar brawl much as the next alpha nerd, and if somebody insults me I’ll give it to them right back. But I’ll at least TRY to communicate with them like they’re a human being first and give them a chance to settle the hell down. Thank you for stepping in and doing this — it’s the only way we’ll ever break this cycle of screaming of inane stereotypes at each other instead of working out solutions.

Really? Remind me who is actually promoting murder… or even stalinism. Oh yeah… no one. You can want these people to be socialists all you like, but the truth is.. and you know it… that the vast majority of them are not.

They should compare and contrast you with the right-winger you’re arguing with, because you’re increasingly starting to sound the same to me. :( Bigendians and littleendians, and I’m getting really tired of it.

First of all, why do these academians need an investigation into ‘possible’ excessive force – there was video – if they can’t connect the dots, they need to do something else for a living. Second of all, every single mayor in every single city says the same thing before assaulting occupy sites ‘public safety issues’ they only become unsafe when the cops arrive!

Lendogg

Clearly, we can all agree the protesters were breaking the law. This seems to be agreed upon by the people having an intelligent debate. The issue the lefties have is the use of force.

How do you people suggest the police handle the situation? What manner were the peace officers supposed to handcuff protesters that.are willfully disobeying orders to disperse? Should the prosters be asked very nicely to turn around so they can be detained? Perhaps offered some tea and crumpets for peacefully coming back to the station? What do you suggest?

Before people make claims of brutality or excessive force, they should be aware of what constitutes as such. I am not an expert in that area or police procedures and policies regarding these matters. Making such claims before knowing the laws regarding these situations is ignorant.

If you cannot watch this video and understand how someone can see it as excessive than you are completely irrational. One does not need to be a expert in police procedures to have an opinion, and if they have an opinion they are certainly not ignorant for it. You may now fuck off, have a good day.

Lendogg

Neither of us know what commands were given to the protesters. They were told to leave, yet they refused to leave. On top of that, they saw police with their battobs oit. Did the protesters assume they were for show?

I have still yet to hear how police should have handled the law-breaking protesters. Please give a logical explanation to handle the situation. Many people say the police should have handled it differently, but no solution has yet to be given.

Telling people to fuck off only shows your stupidity, and lack of ability to have an intelligent conversation. Perhaps this same mentality is being used by the protesters, which explains why they were justifibly hit with battons.

Clark Kent

You’re clearly deranged, and likely find images of prone and defenceless people being repeatedly rammed in ribs and abdomen until internal injuries are sustained titillating. This makes you a pervert.

Suck It

Get beaten by a Cop, asshat.

Kat

What the police did… sure, there was probably no other way they could have handled that situation. But, when someone who gets beaten says, “Okay, you can arrest me now” and holds out their arms to get handcuffed, pulling them to the ground by the hair seems a bit extreme. Putting them against the ground, that’s procedure. But there’s a video where they throw the student on the ground and one of the police officers kicks them. The police officer was just standing there, facing the crowd, and kicks behind him where he knew the student was. Was /that/ really necessary?

You’re right when you say that people keep saying that the police should have handled it differently, however, you miss the biggest point. While their intervention was necessary, there were things they did that were 100% unnecessary and truly brutal. That is the point people are making when they say that “the police should have handled it differently”.

The fact that you could even say that the protestors were “justifibly hit with battons” (which, by the way is spelled “justifiably” and “batons”) is callous, and it shows basically all of Cal exactly what kind of person you are. I’m sorry you don’t agree with OccupyCal, and that’s perfectly acceptable. But when you say that a human being was “justifibly hit with battons” for standing up for what they believe in, I have to wonder what kind of person that makes you.

Anon

If you cannot explain what you think the Police should have done in that situation instead “than you are completely irrational.”

To attack someone for behaving badly but not be able to explain what you think should have been done instead is idiotic.

You may now fuck off, have a terrible day.

Thought plz

And right back at you, you are irrational–let’s think when it would be okay to face down a police officer in spite of their orders. Aaaand then push into their line and assault them. Yup, you deserve the beating you were looking for.
Use some thought and realize how both sides should act and how maybe, just maybe, your angelic students screwed up.

Pspicerwensley

The police and politicians choose when to ignore and when to apply the law. Your facile interpretation of events is foolish. Campus authorities could respond to “health risks” by installing portaloos and portashowers. Mature societies don’t beat up their citizens and can stand a little social dissent. Has the USA become so fascist and the tools of state so controlled by corporate power that any dissent is beaten down? Shame on the campus police. Shame. Infamy is as infamy does.

Guest

So how do you think the Police should have handled the situation, idiot?
What should they have done in that situation?

If you can’t answer that question then you’re just another bigoted leftist asshole who hates all cops.

[Campus authorities could respond to “health risks” by installing portaloos and portashowers.]

You mean like the way liberal cities respond to “homelessness” by providing all sorts of taxpayer-funded support programs for the so-called “homeless” only to see the problem get worse, right? Ever consider that the campus authorities wanted to DISCOURAGE squatting instead of promoting it?

Guest

Citations would be a good start. Either fine or suspend students that put up tents. If they don’t comply give them another citation. At least give it a shot before hitting them with batons. Also, what is wrong with you? You obviously disagree with the politics of the people who are protesting, but what does that have to do with this situatuion? People, that were just standing there, were hit with batons. That doesnt’ seem a bit excessive to you, or does it not matter because they are “lefties”. Do you not have a heart? Seriously, what is wrong with you? People that disagree with you should be dealt with by riot police?

Anonymous

The police warnings against camping were sufficient. When people disobey cops and obstruct their work, for any reason, they risk being violently removed.

Thought plz

You can’t take things out of context: “People, that were just standing there” is invalid and false.